The Board has granted service connection for diabetes mellitus type II and coronary artery disease, finding that the Veteran's exposure to herbicides during service is presumed. The claims for skin cancer, peripheral neuropathy, and hypertension are remanded for additional development.
The deciding factor: The evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran visited the Korean DMZ during his service, which would establish presumptive herbicide exposure.
- Claimed conditions
- diabetes mellitus type II, coronary artery disease, hypertension, basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, actinic keratoses
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 5, 2016
- Citation
- 1604351
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 1604351.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the Veteran's basal cell carcinoma. The Veteran is seeking service connection for this condition, which he claims was caused by exposure to water-based contaminants at Camp Lejeune during his military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hypertension and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities due to insufficient medical opinions regarding their etiology.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.